Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
Originally posted by: Amused
So much for freedom.
Had they been interested in education and awareness campaigns, I'd support them. But it seems they are more interested in authoritarian policy.
Did you bother finding out more about the treaty, or is this just one of your canned "evil socialists are taking away our freedoms" responces?
The report I saw on this said that the treaty is about setting controls on tobacco, such as ones that are already in place in north america. For example, having inappropriate ads, mainly those targetted towards kids in countries with lax rules, would be outlawed. Also things like having models hand out free cigs to kids at concerts would be stopped.
Despite your inferences to the countrary, I find it difficult to believe that you have actually read it. It's not about dissalowing advertisements towards children. It completely disallows tobacco advertising. It forces states to increase tobacco tax. It's eventual goal is a complete ban of cigarettes-not by education, but by force. Something that smokers are notoriously adverse to complying because of. Everyone knows that you need to quit for YOU, not because some schmuck told you to. This is terrible policy. As one man on the bbc forum said... "Is it really right to refuse people their freedom of choice? "
Quote from it:
The FCTC requires all Parties to undertake a comprehensive ban on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship within five years of ratifying the treaty. The ban must include cross-border advertising originating within a Party's territory. The definitions of advertising, promotion and sponsorship are broad and include indirect as well as direct forms. Countries with constitutional constraints are required to restrict advertising, promotion and sponsorship, including cross-border advertising, in a manner consistent with their constitutional principles. The Parties also agree to consider a protocol to elaborate on the cross-border provisions, for example the technical and legal aspects of preventing or blocking advertising on the internet and satellite television.
Complete ban on it unless your constitution says otherwise, AND mandates censorship even in the case of a satellite channel originating from another country who isnt a member. The way to fix the problem of cigarettes being given to children is to clamp down on those giving the kids cigarettes, not draconionally ban all advertisements and promotions. Besides, that certainly isnt a problem here in the states. A
Other disturbing passages from this treaty:
Deceptive labels must be prohibited. Countries agree to prohibit misleading or deceptive terms on tobacco product packages within three years of becoming a Party. Research has proved that cigarettes that are labeled ?light?, ?low tar?, and ?mild? (among other terms) are as dangerous as those denoted as regular and thus these terms mislead and deceive consumers about the risks involved in the use of these products. Although the treaty does not specify the terms that Parties should ban, the scientific evidence would certainly support banning the use of terms such as ?light?, ?mild?, ?low tar?, etc.
Bullsh*t. I smoke "light" cigarettes because the taste is lighter. They have the same warning labels that "regular" cigarettes do. This is the first step towards banning tobacco altogether, which the powers that be would love.
Nonsmokers must be protected in workplaces, public transport and indoor public places. The treaty recognizes that exposure to tobacco smoke has been scientifically proven to cause death, disease and disability. It requires all Parties to implement effective measures to protect nonsmokers from tobacco smoke in public places, including workplaces, public transport and indoor public places -- evidence indicates that only a total smoking ban is effective in protecting non-smokers.
Bullsh*t. At our workplace we have a dedicated smoking room in the back part of the building that is completely ventilated from a system seperate from the rest of the building. It affects NO ONE who is not a smoker.
Furthermore, the language in the treaty clearly promotes a path towards outlawing smoking
anywhere in public, including walking down the street or sitting on your porch. Note the bolded words.
Action is required to eliminate tobacco smuggling. Measures required include marking all tobacco packages in a way that signifies the origin and final destination or the legal status of the product, and cooperating with one-another in anti-smuggling, law enforcement and litigation efforts.
You can be goddamm sure that if they stop my cheap smokes from switzerland, and try to force me to pay $40 a carton that I will NOT be getting my cigarettes from legal or commercial channels. You think the war on drugs is bad? Try artificially (and astronomically) raising cigarette prices, clamping down on smokers, and attempting to force them to buy at retail prices. Then we'd have a war on cigarettes, complete with smoke-easy's. Think that's improbable? That road has already been half-paved by the following:
Taxation & Duty Free Sales (Article 6)
Tobacco tax increases are encouraged. The treaty states that ?each Party should take account of its national health objectives concerning tobacco control? in its tobacco tax and price policies. The treaty recognizes that raising prices through tax increases and other means ?is an effective and important means of reducing tobacco consumption by various segments of the population, in particular young persons.?
Duty-free sales are discouraged. Parties may prohibit or restrict duty-free sales of tobacco products.
Liability (Articles 4.5 and 19)
Legal action is encouraged as a tobacco control strategy. The treaty recognizes that liability issues are an important part of a comprehensive tobacco control program and the Parties agree to consider legislative and litigation approaches to advance tobacco control objectives. Parties also agree to cooperate with one another in tobacco-related legal proceedings.
They are REQUIRING states to cooperate and participate in lawsuits against manufacturers! :|
link:
http://www.fctc.org/highlightsEN.shtml
WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND THE FTC NOW!!! AND DEMAND THAT THIS TREATY
NOT BE RATIFIED.